About your Search

20130107
20130115
STATION
MSNBCW 14
MSNBC 4
WHUT (Howard University Television) 4
CSPAN2 2
KQED (PBS) 2
CSPAN 1
KRCB (PBS) 1
WETA 1
LANGUAGE
English 34
Search Results 0 to 33 of about 34 (some duplicates have been removed)
. here's a guy four years ago john mccain was saying chuck hagel would make a great secretary of state. bill crystal was saying eight years ago chuck hagel should be vice president of the united states. if ronald reagan or george bush or mitt romney nominated chuck hagel, they would be saying he's a republican! he's a conservative. he's a war hero! he's one of ours but barack obama nominates him and right away, they're trying to bring him down. >> i found it amazing that, of all the people to come out and say they had reservations and concerns about chuck hagel, john mccain was leading that argument. i can almost understand some of the guys who have just -- are not -- haven't been in the congress or haven't been in the senate that long but john mccain's been here long enough. he knows better. >> bill: if anybody is a blood brother to chuck hagel, it's john mccain. but there's a total smear campaign. two issues. let's deal with them quickly. one, they say he's anti-israel. baloney! you look at his votes. that's what counts. he voted for billions of billions of dollars of military aid to
't like the guy. i didn't. a lot of people didn't like the guy. i understand why john mccain wouldn't like a republican senator that endorsed a democrat. i understand. he doesn't play well with others in the sandbox. he certainly didn't when he was in the senate. i got to know him, though, through the years, and we got to know him. we like him. we respect him. he said some things about israel that caused me concerns. >> yeah. >> but he's going to be the president's secretary of defense. and i just wonder, what's better for democrats politically? if barack obama gets his republican secretary of defense or if republicans who, after deep sixing an african-american woman for secretary of state, now turn and savage one of their own? what's better for barack obama? because i personally think that republicans killing hagel's nomination is the best political thing that could ever happen to democrats. because it makes republicans just look obstructionist. >> well, i'll dial that back a couple points on the meter. the president losing a nomination fight would be bad for him and there would be costs
with republicans. >> who does john mccain like today besides lindsey? anybody else? >> i don't think so. >> he doesn't like chuck hagel. >> let me disagree with something. this is not a change in policy. the president came in saying he would end the iraq war and the afghan war. he would get rid of the iraq war and take the afghanistan war and slow it down, basically downsize it. that's what he's been doing for the last four years despite the neocons screaming about it all the way. chuck hagel is a continuation on that. when he had to, he stared down petraeus. [ overlapping speakers ] >> you guys have john boldin after saying this is clinton with somehow faking her concussion. >> i didn't say that. the president can have who he wants. i like chuck hagel. if he gets it, i'm fine with it. >> suppose your guy won the race the guy you thought would win. and he put boldin in, the strange mustache guy. would they have put him in there? >> i don't think romney would have put bolton in. >> let's talk about the fiscal cliff. that's behind us. that turkey's behind us. >> we got others. >> we have lived t
mccain ran for president at the same time? >> john mccain is a very close friend of mine. there is no one i admire more than john mccain. we think alike on many things. we are different too. we disagree on issues. but how all of this plays out over the next two years, i don't know. but regardless of how it plays out, we will always be a good friend and i will always be a great admirer of him and i am grateful for his service to our country. >> if he runs will that impede you from running? >> i think in this business any decision one makes in life, that decision has to come from you first. it's got to come from you t considerations are your family, are other personal issues. then you start working through the more external conditions. you know in this business that if you run for president, there will be many very qualified candidates out there. some will be good friends i suspect. you know that and you factor that in. and you're not unmindful of that kind of competition. and that kind of competition is good for the country, it's good for our system. we want the best people in this busine
john mccain? >> well, i think john mccain and lindsey graham and a few others may say it. but listen, very important to go back to the debt ceiling debate, which we came to the edge of real financial crisis in this country. guess who was on jon stewart and stephen colbert in saying we're spending $120 billion in a country with $14 billion of gdp and it's not good for america. grover norquist. grover norquist was out educating conservatives that this afghanistan war was not in their interests from a financial perspective. forget the strategic questions. and from his work, i think, you really begin to see a quick collapse of conservative support. progressives and i think most independents already had a great deal of skepticism about afghanistan. but it has been these debt issues that have really driven a real collapse of interest and support for afghanistan. so anyone that comes and radically supports an ongoing troop presence in afghanistan is going to look very, very much out of the mainstream to use some of the comments lately that folks have tried to rile up about chuck hagel. >> l
now has criticized the iraq war. he's criticized virtually every view john mccain has had about foreign policy. and john mccain's a leading figure in the republican party on foreign policy. so it's not surprising to me. what you have to see is how well the white house defends this pick. right now this is a pick that doesn't have a lot of friends on either side of the party. ultimately democrats are going to listen to what barack obama says about his own cabinet. another thing important to mention here is like matt was saying a bit is, take the john brennan pick. the john kerry pick. obama's trying to surround himself with people he really is friends with and likes. the first term was people like hillary clinton, jim jones, bob gates. they're big names. those aren't necessarily obama allies. brennan, hagel, kerry, susan rice, these are really people obama knows and is close to. that's what he's trying to build for his second term. >> i want to bring in congressman adam schiff, democrat from california. always good to see you, congressman, good morning. >> thank you. good morning.
crisis, you know, when the bank meltdown was upon us, and john mccain was deciding to suspend the campaign, the decision came as a result of a meeting he had with the economic advisory team. a lot of these were big donors. mitt romney was among them, and all of those guys said take it, take whatever they offer. take it. this looks bad. the next day, in fact, romney went on the "today" show supporting t.a.r.p.. that's one thing governor rosmny modified many positions, but has not, however, the support of t.a.r.p.. if there's a president romney, and if there continue to be difficulties with the banks, then under those sishes, yes, there could be a recipe for more regulation. >> sure? >> what impact, if any, do you think the changes in california, in their method for electing congressional representatives will have, and what are the -- >> referring to the redistricting? >> yes and democrat versus democrat, republican versus republican in their, you know, their system of electing -- >> yeah. if i'm understanding you right, i think you're referring to now there was a kind of bipart
to susan by some members of the congress was outrage us. but-- . >> rose: john mccain, for example. >> well, i mean, yes, he and others. i think that it was-- it was predicated by politics. and not the public interest. but that said, you know, when the president made his choice he made a positive choice, not a grudging choice, because he has known john kerry, he served with john kerry. john kerry's been an extraordinary partner with the administration over the last four years in the foreign relations. >> rose: and has undertaken missions for the president, syria and other places. >> has indeed. so the president has great confidence in him. he knows chuck hagel well, they traveled to iraq and afghanistan together. i think he admired hagel's strength and independence in standing up on some of these issues in the senate. and he i was intrigued by hagel's status as someone who has actually been an enlisted man, two purple hearts, understands the wages of war. >> rose: and are friends too, i mean he liked him. >> there's no doubt that he likes him. and i, you know, i think that the fact that the
are supportive of israel. >> well, john mccain a fellow vietnam war vet, he released a statement after today's announcement saying, quote, chuck hagel served our nation with honor in vietnam, and i congratulate him on this nomination. i have serious concerns about the positions senator hagel has taken on a range of critical national security issues in recent years. you listen to some of this vitriol, it's like he's charles lindberg or something. i have been to israel so many times. you have doves in the community over there, you have moderates, people like perez who is almost godly in his love for peace. you got all kinds of people over there with different views. isn't the american secretary of defense allowed to have a particular view that's in the middle or slightly to the left or does it have to be bibi netanyahu to have -- >> if you go to tel aviv and look at the debate -- >> it's wide open. >> wide open. here it's much more -- >> if you're not for bibi, you're not considered pro-israel. >> chuck hagel is not a pacifist. number two, he's a war is last resort rather than war is first res
was in 2011. hagel, though, still has his own fight on his hands. yet senator john mccain acknowledged that his skepticism about the nomination of his long time friend and ally has its roots, and why they've split since, has its roots in the fact that hagel split with mccain on the iraq surge. >> we both knew that we were losing the war in iraq. lindsey graham and i and joe lieberman and others said we need a surge. and the president somewhat reluctantly adopted the surge and it succeeded. senator hagel obviously said it couldn't. and he called it the biggest blunder since the vietnam war. that is a really gross misconception of america's role there and in the world. >> south carolina senator lindsey graham said he could put a hold on cia nominee john brennan's nomination until the white house addresses questions about benghazi again. quote -- i do not believe we should confirm anyone as director of the cia until our questions are answered, like who changed ambassador susan rice's talking points and deleted the references to al qaeda. my support for a delaying confirmation is not direc
she was immediately attacked and a25kd in the most debasing terms by people like john mccain saying, she's not smart enough and really attacked her in such an ugly way that i think it's ironic that anyone from the party having seen and witnessed and participated in that would turn the charge around on the president. >> so there's an interesting question here, i think, which is -- who has standing to make this claim? which i think ends up being the kind of second beat of the conversation because i've seen people respond to and i think, completely legitimately respond to it by being the white house press core. hello? have you seen the white house press core? white men and white men and white men and some women. >> the operative word, the first word, the white house press core. >> and media broadly is incredibly male and incredibly white. and so the question is -- who has the standing to make the claim? i think people -- there's some kind of understandable resistance to anyone attacking the white house be it seems like it's kind of a cop-out. it's the president of the united states and
this is all about. which is a first-class smear campaign by john mccain and lindsey graham. is it going to work? >> no. i don't think it's going to work. >> bill: it is despicable what they're doing. >> it is absolutely terrible. the whole thing what they did to susan rice also. >> bill: a month ago. >> unbelievable. it is not going to work. hagel has enough support. enough support among former ambassadors, former military people. both parties. former diplomats of both parties. there's going to be a substantial vote against him i think. by that, i mean 15 or 20. >> bill: republicans? >> yeah. i don't see any democrats going against him. we'll see. i don't know. they say schumer is going to send a big signal on the israel question. but i think chuck will be for him. >> bill: tough for republicans, i'm not disagreeing with you but still tough for them. here's a guy who is a war hero, who is a patriot, who is a republican. you know, who sort of -- if mitt romney nominated him, they would probably be saying -- hey one of our guys. >> of course they would. he's an -- as far as that type. >>
the answers that he and his republican colleagues, kelly ayotte, john mccain have been pushing for from clinton from the obama administration and the attacks on benghazi last september. so there is already quite a bit of republican opposition growing for that nomination. the aclu's weighed in as well. there are a number of groups who are being very strong in that opposition. >> peter: you've got the republicans who are -- they have a problem with the techniques that brennan put in place while serving for the president that those same republicans supported. and the same ideas that they supported. >> funny how that works, isn't it? >> peter: weird. >> it is going to be something if republicans are going to fight a nominee they'll have to pick one and coordinate. honestly, i don't see a filibuster for any of these nominees at this point. >> peter: it also strikes me as the definition of playing politics when you take a completely separate issue and you say well, like lindsey graham is doing. i'm going to hold these nomination up until i get my answers on this totally separate thing. i don'
lost by a wide margin in 1996, john kerry, john mccain, none of them was in negative territory. all of them had more people viewing them favorably than unfavorably. this was really something we hadn't seen before in election polling. now, part of that reflects the greater polarization of american politics right now. it used to be the case that a lot of voters of the other side even though they were committed to voting democratic still would like the other guy. i mean, even in 2008, you know, a lot of democrats liked john mccain. they thought he was an okay guy, they just weren't going to vote for him. and now i think we're in a period of kind of greater partisanship in some respects so that his ratings were much lower among obama supporters and democrats in general than is typical for that kind of cross-party opposition. but the bigger issue was among independent voters, among the sort of middle of the electorate. he was just an unappealing candidate, and it wasn't just that they weren't excited about him, they actively didn't like him. to say that you feel unfavorably about somebod
to terrorism cases. john mccain said of nomination, quote, i have many questions and concerns about the nomination especially what role he played in the so-called enhanced interrogation programs. i plan to examine this aspect of mr. brennan's record very closely. while denouncing waterboarding as un-american in a 2007 interview, brennan told cbs news the program was valuable. quote, there has been a lot of information that has come out of these interrogation procedures that the agency has in fact used against real hardcore terrorists t has saved lives. aside from what critics describe as significant inconsistencies in his public states they also question whether brennan can recast himself as neutral after four years inside the white house. jenna. jenna: that's interesting. any reaction now from the white house? are they telegraphing how they might defend brennan against some of these criticisms?. >> reporter: well, this week the white house emphasizing that brennan in a letter for years ago denounced the cia program. since he earned trust from the president as his counterterrorism a
, but mccain would necessarily vote against his old friend, chuck hagel. sdoo fellow vietnam. >> right. >> combat veteran. susan paige, we are also seeing the discussion perculating about john brennan. what is clear is there was such a personal connection. barack obama was so happy to be nominating john brennan tore sar. veteran cia. at the same time, with the coincidence of zero dark 30 and all of the talk about the post-9/11 celebration gargs -- enhanced interrogation techniques, that was on john brennan's watch, but what the president is saying is that john brennan is going to be in charge of the newark technical tour to refine drone attacks and continuing this undeclared war and also interrogation techniques to create a legal framework going forward. >> i saw that the president's remarks when he named brennan were interesting because he went exactly at this point. he said he had been an advocate for obeying the law, for being a nation of laws when it comes to these kind of attacks, and i think that john brennan has done a lot since this issue pretty much cost him head of the cia th
Search Results 0 to 33 of about 34 (some duplicates have been removed)